SUMIT SURYAKANT TILEKAR,PUNE vs. ITO, WARD 14(5), PUNE, PUNE

First we take up ITA No.1513/PUN/2026 as the lead case. Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is an individual engaged in the business of land

Since the assessee did not respond to the various notices issued by the office of the Ld. CIT(A), the Ld. CIT(A) relying on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. B.N. Bhattacharjee & Another reported in 118 ITR

Aggrieved with such order of the Ld. CIT(A) the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal by raising the following grounds: 1. Under the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, Ld. AO has erred in estimating Assessee's business Income at Rs.1,14,81,500/-. 2. Under the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, Ld. AO has erred in considering Assessee's business turnover at Rs.5,74,07,500/-, while estimating assessee's business income. 3. Under the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, Ld. AO has erred in making addition of Rs.6,01,52,000/- u/s. 68 of the Act. 4. Under the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, Ld. AO has erred in making addition of Rs.5,89,16,750/- u/s 69C. 5. Under the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the assessee has claimed deduction under Chapter VI-A of Rs.61,964/-, Ld. AO has erred in denying the said deduction. 6. Under the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Order issued u/s 148A(d) is merely relied on statement recorded in survey, hence the said order is bad in law. Accordingly, Assessment Proceedings based on such order is also bad in law.

The Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that various grounds were raised before the Ld. CIT(A) challenging the validity of re-assessment proceedings as well as the addition on merit. Further, the assessment has been reopened beyond a period of 3 years and therefore, the approval of PCCIT or DGIT should have been obtained whereas the approval has been obtained from the PCIT. He submitted that the additions have been made u/s 69C which is beyond the scope of show cause notice issued. Further, even after estimating the income, additions u/s 68 and 69 have been made which is against the provisions. He accordingly submitted that given an opportunity the assessee is in a position to substantiate his case by filing the requisite details before the Ld. CIT(A).

The Ld. DR on the other hand strongly opposed the arguments advanced by the Ld. Counsel for the assessee and submitted that as many as 5 opportunities

We have heard the rival arguments made by both the sides, perused the orders of the Assessing Officer and the Ld. CIT(A) and the paper book filed on behalf of the assessee. We have also considered the various decisions cited before us. It is an admitted fact that due to non-submission of the requisite details before the Assessing Officer, he passed the order u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Act determining the total income of the assessee at Rs.13,10,46,750/- as against the returned income of Rs.15,10,412/-. We find due to non-appearance before the Ld. CIT(A) despite 5 opportunities granted, he dismissed the appeal upholding the various additions made by the Assessing Officer. It is the submission of the Ld. Counsel for the assessee that the re-assessment proceedings are invalid as well as the various additions made by the Assessing Officer are also un-called for especially when in the show cause notice there is no mention of any addition u/s 69C. Further when income is estimated, no separate addition u/s 68 and 69 is called for. It is also his submission that given an opportunity, the assessee is in a position to substantiate his case by filing the requisite details. Considering the totality of the facts of the case and in the interest of justice, we deem it proper to restore the issue back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) with a direction to grant one final opportunity to the assessee to substantiate his case by filing the requisite details and decide the issue as per fact and law. The assessee is also hereby directed to make his submission, if any, on the appointed date without seeking any

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

After hearing both the sides, we find the facts of the case are identical to the facts of the case in ITA No.1513/PUN/2026. We have already decided the issue and restored the same to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. Following similar reasonings, we restore the above appeals to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) with similar directions. The grounds raised by the assessee are accordingly allowed for statistical purposes.

In the result, all the 4 appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.